_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
tkeith
-
Posts
1,384 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Donations
0.00 USD
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by tkeith
-
-
I recall the Pirates that, in was it "78 or '79?, at least one World Series game they didn't sell out. I lived in Pittsburgh at the time, and I remember thinking that I could just drive right down and buy a ticket to the World Series! However, it was snowing lightly, so I didn't bother.
AND Three Rivers Stadium held, what, 72K?
-
Is it just me or is Dick Stockton a terrible announcer? He seemed to make numerous flubs last night when calling the Dodgers/Cubs game for TBS. 1 Example: The Dodgers had just finished batting at the top of the 7'th innning. Stockton then announces we'll return for the top of the 8'th!
Yep. I remember thinking a couple of times that he had messed up the count or number of outs.
Wouldn't it be something if the Dodgers advance and the Angels get bounced?
Lovin' the Rays win today. Longoria! And it was good to hear Harold Reynolds back in the broadcast booth. I always was suspicious of the way he got turfed out at ESPN. Never smelled right to me.
Reynolds: Agreed. He was the best part of BBTN, followed by Kruk. Having Olney show up on that show is a travesty.
Stockton sucks, always did. He's one of the reasons I didn't enjoy Sox broadcasts as a kid; fucking blowhard of Musberger proportions.
-
Open thanks to MLB for the asinine decision to schedule the Sox series West Coast primetime so that no one with a job or academic obligations could see a single pitch. Selig doesn't get it. The game is not as popular among young fans, yet they continue to schedule broadcasts so late as to eliminate the possibility of reversing that trend.
-
Don't know who's going to win what, but I'm thinking the Brewers might be very dangerous in a short series. I'm liking them as a dark horse.
I hope you're right. I'd love the Rays/Brewers series, but I'd REALLY love to have the Sox meet up with the Brewers and exact some revenge for the late-70s/early-80s matchups!
-
Any predictions?
ALCS
TB
LAA
LAA IN 6
NLCS
MIL
CHC
MIL IN 6
WS WINNER
LAA IN 6
ALDS -- Boston in 5, Tampa Bay in 4
NLDS -- Chicago in 4, Philadelphia in 4
ALCS -- Boston in 6
NLCS -- Chicago in 6
WS -- Boston in 6
-
Go Sox! Failing that, go Rays! In the NL, go Brewers!!!
-
Fixed.Nice for the Yanks to help the stumbling Rays out and make sure in a laugher that the Red Sox are the WC who now must play the team with the best record in baseball, the Angels, who they OWN in October.
Like this means jack shit. Didn't the Yankees once "own" the Red Sox? Did that ensure victory? For that matter, the Sox once lost like a dozen playoff games in a row, and everyone "owned" them. Did that continue?
What's past is past. There's absolutely no guarantee that the recent stretch of success against the Angels in October will continue. In fact, its more likely to end than to continue, because strong teams don't lose over and over and over and over without end.
Oops, sorry, I forgot they have the edge in the all-important category of "experience". Like key players Bay, Lowrey, Masterson ... they've all got tons of playoff experience. Better book those duck boats now!
:rolleyes: Gee, Dan, guess we're making each other's arguments now. Or are you just trying to be an ass hat? Either way, mission accomplished.
-
Fixed.
Nice for the Yanks to help the stumbling Rays out and make sure in a laugher that the Red Sox are the WC who now must play the team with the best record in baseball, the Angels, who they OWN in October. -
FYI
We are gonna sweep the Bosox
Payback for last year's ALCS
Not that it really matters
oops
Side note: Here's crap in the Skankees eye for omitting even video footage of Joe Torre from their celebration. That's the sort of class I'd expect from a Dan Duquette-run franchise, not the New York Yankees.
-
Discovered this browsing the internet the other day. Recorded in November 2007. It's on Jazzwerkstatt 035. With Lafayette Gilchrist, Jaribu Shahid and Hamid Drake.
Good stuff.
-
There's a study by Micheal Wolverton which examined players from post-WWII thru 2003 with at least 30 AB comparing their first playoff experience to their last. Batters performed better better as virgins (.755 OPS) than in their last postseason (.720 OPS.) Now obviously this could be skewed towards the decline in productivity due to old age, but it shows that ability trumps experience. Pitchers also performed better in their first playoff compared to their last (2.86 ERA vs. 3.50.)
And repeating myself, but before the rosters were expanded at the start of the month the Yankees had 24 guys with playoff experience. That sure hasn't helped 'em this year (nor have a buttload of injuries, duh), nor has the advantage in experience helped them win another World Series in the past 7 years.
Mind you I don't mind having players with some on my team, but I wouldn't care for those with the experience like Timlin had for the M's.
Fine. The Red Sox are doomed and Tampa Bay should be simply crowned. Dan is absolutely right and should never be questions. Egad! No wonder the Red Sox didn't win a championship for 86 years; many of their fans didn't deserve. Learn the game.
-
The '05 White Sox had experienced players who'd done it elsewhere AND Ozzie (yes, manager's experience counts).
Jermaine Dye. Freddy Garcia. There were 2 or 3 others who had one & done experience. But both the Red Sox and Angels had more "experience" in 2005. So this is a case of the less experienced team winning over the more experienced.
I'm sure Giants fans are forever grateful Dusty went with Livan in game 7 because of his experience. He should have gone with Gregg behind the plate.
As for the rest, welcome to the board Joe Morgan!
I didn't comment on degree of experience. Just being there matters. Is this a new concept?
-
The Pythagorean won-loss is a nifty stat and it's frequently way off. It's designed by the hardcore SABRmetricians who analyze stats from the age of two yet rarely don a glove. The best team doesn't always win (01 Yankees, 03 Yankees, 02 Giants to name a few).
Shows what little you know. No one has ever used the Pythag to predict the results of a post-season series!
What the Pythag shows is that the Red Sox ought to be in a better position for the post-season because they ought to be in position to clinch home field advantage.
And as far as your "experience trumps all" after-the-fact explanation: can we formalize it in some way? Do we count up the players on each team that have made the playoffs with other teams, sort of a reverse "ex-Cub factor"??
No Dan. We watch the games and see what happens. Again, all I know comes from 40 years of watching and about 35 of playing. I'll just defer to your expertise.
-
The X-factor being that the Rays don't have post-season experience, and that matters.
Bah.
2005 White Sox
2003 Marlins
2002 Angels
2001 D-backs
The Yankees have had lots of playoff experience in this century and no titles to show for it. I'll take the better team of the year, you can have the experience.
Bah back at you. The only team that goes against the argument is the '03 Marlins. The '05 White Sox had experienced players who'd done it elsewhere AND Ozzie (yes, manager's experience counts). '02 Angels had Scocia which counts for a lot! '01 D-Backs had a number of players who had been there, as well. Bah all you want, but the Sox have experience (and you can check the history on this) on their side. There are MANY teams that perform better in the regular season, but seems like the experienced team usually wins out in the end (again, '03 Marlins not knowing what they didn't know are the exception).
Dan, your argument might work in fantasy baseball, but doesn't really translate to MLB. Run differential could be skewed if they blowout a lot of teams.No, it works in real baseball too. Every now & then there are cases where it doesn't, like last year's D-backs.
The Pythagorean won-loss is a nifty stat and it's frequently way off. It's designed by the hardcore SABRmetricians who analyze stats from the age of two yet rarely don a glove. The best team doesn't always win (01 Yankees, 03 Yankees, 02 Giants to name a few).
-
Dan, I'm not sure I understand your point when you say "A run differential of 158." Does that mean the Red Sox score 158 MORE runs than the opposition or LESS? If it's less, then I see your point. If it's more, then it would seem to me that this year may be one of those years where no matter how good the Sox are, the Rays might be better.
Thank you, my point exactly. The X-factor being that the Rays don't have post-season experience, and that matters. Dan, your argument might work in fantasy baseball, but doesn't really translate to MLB. Run differential could be skewed if they blowout a lot of teams. Fact is, they're a deep, solid team who went through a lot of nonsense with he-who-shall-not-be-named-in-this-post earlier this season. They're in second place by TWO FRIGGIN' GAMES to, arguably, the best team in the league this year if not all of baseball. In a few weeks, everybody is 0-0, and the Sox carry the lion's share of experience. They're not in bad shape at all, and certainly have not underachieved given the myriad injuries and assorted nonsense. If anything, they have grossly OVERachieved.
-
This is shaping up to be 2005 all over again. Grossly underachieving team, Wild Card entry into the playoffs (lucky to get it) and bounced in the first round. Count on it.
Grossly underachieving? Youk is having a career year; Pedroia is being mentioned as an MVP candidate; a rookie SS, injured 3B, insane LF mailing it in to force a trade, aging super-hero catcher with a prescription for Kryptonite. Honestly, Dan, you're quite delusional. How about just giving the Rays credit for having a helluva team and playing really well. Sox have had issues and injuries that would have destroyed most teams. Underachieving... gimme a break.
-
Man you Sox fans, you kill me!!! Matt Garza, a shitty pitcher??? I have heard more than once his stuff compared to Smoltz. 11-9 3.66 ERA for the year, still 24. I'll take that shit any day....
Not sure anybody called him a shitty pitcher -- if they did, I missed it. But he certainly was not made to look like "Cy Fucking Young." Not getting pulled without getting out of the fifth.
-
Yeah... sure looked good against Papi in the first.
-
Objection! In fact, even in a short series, they'd only see him twice.
Do you mean, even in a long series? Sonnanstine wouldn't throw twice in a short series.
Fact is, the Rays are a completely unknown quantity in the playoffs. They may clutch up. They may win the whole banana. They've shown they can play lights-out for long stretches, and they can go into the tank for 7 straight games. They can go -- what was it, 2-for-20 something over two games in Boston with runners in scoring position? -- and still have enough pitching and defense to win. It's a complete crap shoot with them in the mix, IMHO. They may just be idiots enough to think they can do it!
(I count 6 cliches total. Not too bad.)
I meant in a short series. You're correct, he would NOT likely be faced twice in a short series, but in a best case scenario for the Rays, he'd make 2 starts. Three wins are required. You're correct about it being a crap shoot -- they're a near complete unknown. However, over a lifetime of watching this game, I'm pretty confident in my team's ability and experience against an unknown (i.e. -- totally inexperienced) team. Hinske is a big X-factor, but I still like the Sox chances and standing. I'm not ready to leap off the Tobin and/or virtually shout racial criticisms at Daisuke because he loses a game. There's a lot of baseball to play, and NOTHING is settled, yet. All things being equal, I'm very pleased with the Sox chances. That's all I'm saying.
-
How in motherfucking hell can we make Andy Fucking Sonnanstine look like Cy Fucking Young?
If they don't figure out how to hit that pathetic bum, they'll never get past the Rays when it counts.
Objection! In fact, even in a short series, they'd only see him twice. He may look like Cy Young in the regular season, but I'll lay odds he's going to look like Matt Young in the playoffs. I remain unconcerned. Neither am I concerned over Anaheim; a completely different team against the Sox in the playoffs.
-
I understand the firing, though I disagree with it. I find the ESPN comments about precedent rather annoying. It's that parochial attitude that you can't do something that hasn't been done by John McGraw that hurts baseball. Brewers could wind up looking like geniuses. It's pretty well documented that Yost is an intense guy who can pass his tension on to players without intending to, so maybe a more relaxed person at the helm will help. I don't know if Sveum is that guy, but I know he's a helluva lot better choice than Ted Simmons (who should be a perennial contender for the Grady "Gump" Little award).
Meanwhile, a virtual tie for first place and a pretty healthy handle on the wildcard. Live is good for those of us who didn't nose-dive off the bandwagon.
-
Go Cubs!!!!!
:lol: First no-hitter in 36 years. Cubs now have a baker's dozen.
Man... Lou gets no respect.
-
A nice win and return to form by Wakefield but here's another Francona decision I cannot comprehend. Wake is at 94 pitches with a chance to throw a shutout, you've got a doubleheader tomorrow with Byrd going in the early game and Colon in the late game. So what does he do? Send out Delcarmen to finish it off. Like he won't be needed a couple of more times in tighter games than 7-0. Not to mention the fact that I'm pretty sure shutouts by 42 year olds are a fairly rare event in ML history.
Have to agree with you here. If he's going to be an ass-hat and not let Wake finish, at least trot out the other 42-year-old piece of stale luncheon meat and let him try to "build his confidence." Hell, let Alex Fucking Cora finish it.
-
Nice! Thanks for posting. Loved both those cats.
I have something that qualifies as 'as strange' as this: Sammy Davis, Jr., covering Theme From Shaft. I love Sammy, but that's a little tough for me to 'dig.'
MLB 2008
in Miscellaneous - Non-Political
Posted
Fair enough. It's merely a colossal number for a baseball stadium instead of a ginormous one. My point was, Pittsburgh has a population of 360K and a baseball park that was actually a football stadium. As such, it's no surprise they had empty seats. For the home opener against the Dodgers in 1997, they were sold out (post after they'd added the tarps); my seats were so far back it was hard to tell Mike Piazza from Pedro Astacio (slight exaggeration).